Planning Commission asks for more information on solar proposal

The possible expansion of solar panel allowances in the county prompted debate Wednesday at a meeting of the county Planning and Zoning Commission.

New guidelines proposed by the county Environmental Advisory Council, or EAC, recommend that homeowners in residential districts have the option to install panels on the roof of their home or other structures on their property. Currently, roof-mounted panels are permitted only on the roof of the home.

The size restrictions for ground-mounted panels, which are currently limited to a maximum of 120 square feet, would change as well, allowing those with more property to build larger arrays.

Under the proposed guidelines, owners of a lot measuring a half-acre or less would be allowed a maximum of 120 square feet of panels. That number would grow to 240 square feet for between a half-acre and a full acre of land, and to 480 square feet for between 1 and 3 acres. Owners of property larger than 3 acres would be permitted to install solar panels that would total up to the equivalent of one-and-a-half times the square footage of the roofs of all structures on that property.

The proposed changes, EAC members Karen Leatherwood, Curt Barrett and David Hynes said, were brought about after the Board of Commissioners requested that the council look at other jurisdictions and determine whether the county's limits on residential solar panel size could be expanded.

County Commissioner Richard Rothschild, R-District 4, who voted in May against sending the EAC's recommendations to the planning commission, presented the commission with a slideshow depicting his concerns about expanding access to solar panels in residential parts of the county.

Ground-mounted solar panels, he said, are often unsightly and should be treated the same as propane or any other energy-producing machinery would be.

"We should apply the same [reasoning] we would apply to any industrial appliance," Rothschild told the group.

He told the commission that he sees little aesthetic difference between the backside of a solar array and that of a billboard.

"We wouldn't even think of letting someone put up a 400-square-foot billboard … yet this is what neighbors see," he said.

Rothschild recommended to the commission that they focus on changing the setback required for panels in a residential zoning area. He suggested a requirement that any ground-mounted panels be placed closer to the home of the owner than to that of their neighbor.

Some commission members said they shared Rothschild's concerns.

"I love the idea of solar panels, but I do have concerns about the aesthetics, being in the real estate business," commission member Daniel Hoff said. "I have a lot of concerns about how this is going to all play out … what this is going to all end up looking like."

With most of the concern focused on ground-mounted panels, Hoff asked whether a stipulation could be included in county code allowing only roof-mounted panels in residential areas.

Commissioner Richard Weaver, R-District 2, responded that ground-mounted arrays are the best or only option for some homeowners, and they can allow for tracking, or rotating the panels to follow the sun throughout the day, dramatically improving efficiency.

Weaver noted that the Board of Commissioners voted down Rothschild's idea regarding the distance to neighboring houses in May.

As things stand now, Weaver said, there is nothing preventing a neighbor from building something else, like a shed, on the part of their property closest to their neighbor. A shed, he said, could be far larger than the permitted size of a solar array.

Weaver said he was uncomfortable imposing a tougher setback requirement on solar panels that would apply to other structures on a property.

"Where do we start and where do we stop?" he asked.

Others said the point is moot.

Jay Voight, zoning administrator for the county, said he reviews all solar panel applicants in the county.

Usually, he said, owners install them as close to their home as possible in an effort to get the most out of them.

"Generally, they're fairly close to the house because of the efficiency of transportation [of energy]," he said.

The commission asked the EAC to return with more information regarding what other jurisdictions do to prevent homeowners from installing panels too close to their neighbors. They also asked to hear from professionals involved in the solar industry at a future meeting.